Investments in Whole-Person Health: How Employers Can Spearhead a Paradigm Shift

Employers invest in human capital for both their internal and external communities. At Milken Institute Health, we view the workplace as its own community, in which organizational leadership is uniquely positioned to introduce, model, communicate, and normalize a “whole-person” approach to health that prioritizes physical, mental, and financial well-being equally. Investments in whole-person health can come in the form of expanded health benefits, changes to internal policies and programs, shifts in workplace culture to allow people to bring their “whole selves” to work, and increased levels of opportunity that recognize the many roles and responsibilities employees take on, such as caregiving.

Sabrina Spitaletta, senior director, Public Health at the Milken Institute, sat down with Kim McLear, PhD, social justice advocate, military veteran, and CEO of Humanity Amplified, a boutique design studio for changemakers, to discuss ways leadership within organizations can lead with whole-person health in mind.

Employers are defining "whole-person health” in various ways. As an employer, how do you envision a whole-person health approach in the workplace and in community investments from the employer??

I envision new social innovations where whole-person health is reimagined, beginning with the underlying relationships between employer and employee. Tricia Hersey, best-selling author of Rest Is Resistance: A Manifesto, stated, “You were not just born to center your entire existence on work and labor. You were born to heal, to grow, to be of service to yourself and community, to practice, to experiment, to create, to have space, to dream, and to connect.” While offering affordable and equitable insurance options for employees is fundamental, ensuring workplaces are safe is paramount. Safety includes equitable and transparent policies for hiring, salaries, promotion, sick leave, caregiving, and flexible work schedules, as well as safety from toxicity and abuse. In these healthier work environments, workers have voice, creativity, and agency at work, and more capacity to heal and serve their communities outside of work. Employers can also invest in targeted community programs to increase employee awareness of financial and social well-being.

What are the risks if employers do not adopt or move towards a whole-person health approach?

At a minimum, employers have a responsibility to ensure workplaces are equitable and safe, free from toxicity, exploitation, and abuse. Speaking from direct experience as a survivor and former military whistleblower who exposed unlawful and abusive work environments in the US Coast Guard, the risks are very high when employers disregard worker safety. The American Psychological Association found that employees who experience toxic work environments are at higher risk for negative health outcomes, including burnout, PTSD, and chronic stress. “Chronic stress from workplace abuse can lead to depression, heart disease, cancer, and other illnesses,” says US Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy, MD. Additionally, the negative impacts of toxic work environments often extend far beyond the workplace, damaging personal relationships, risking pregnancies, and exacerbating the loneliness epidemic. Employers who do not foster healthy work environments are likely to see employee disengagement, absenteeism, burnout, low morale, and high turnover. In some cases, NBC News reports that employees being exposed to high levels of workplace culture toxicity can cause death. From a talent loss perspective, other risks include a decrease in innovation, economic prosperity, and even national security.

What steps are employers uniquely positioned to take to normalize and achieve a whole-person health approach??(internally and in the community)

Employers can position themselves to normalize and achieve whole-person health through internal flexible policies and practices that emphasize the unique needs of people within the workforce. As just one example, data from the Principle Financial report revealed 35 percent of employees are concerned about burnout, while 60 percent of caregivers feel this pain. The report estimates that more than 25 percent of caregivers who care for both children and parents left the workforce due to these additional dual caregiving responsibilities. Adopting and implementing programs that support the needs of caregivers benefits not only the individual’s health but also reduces burnout and turnover. In another example, the United States is one of the few developed countries without paid parental leave laws. According to The New York Times, a 2024 survey by?Ernst & Young revealed that 83 percent of millennials are seeking paid parental leave benefits. They would be more likely to apply to work for an organization that offered paid parental leave benefits. Astoundingly, 38 percent would even consider relocating outside of the United States to work for an organization that had this benefit. Beyond the workplace, employers can partner with community organizations that focus on holistic health for workers, such as Vanguard Voices, Workplace Promise Institute, and End Workplace Abuse. These organizations examine the psychosocial impacts of toxic work environments and offer resources for organizations striving to create equitable policies and culture.

In your opinion, which organizational leadership roles or positions need to be involved for this integrated approach to be adopted across the organization and in the surrounding community?

Integrating a whole-person health approach, like many other integrated approaches, must involve all organizational stakeholders. In addition to these leadership positions, employers can also build awareness with employee resource groups (ERGs). These ERGs are often dedicated groups based on affinity, including LGBTQ+, Black, disability, Indigenous, Hispanic, Asian, etc. These groups understand the needs of the employees and serve as bridges between the workforce and the senior leadership. The last four years of my military career were primarily remote. At that time, ERGs advocated for continued work flexibility schedules as workers touted how much better they were able to manage whole-person health needs by minimizing exposure to toxic work environments and seeking health care from providers. Additionally, in larger organizations, ERGs also play a pronounced role in the local communities. In this lens, integration must not abandon the principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion. On the contrary, successful integration of whole-person health requires nuance, fairness, and compassion.

How do employers build a sustainable whole-person health approach that anticipates the ebb and flow of the external environment, whether those are shifts in the economic, social, or political landscape?

The future of work depends on our ability to reimagine labor systems that are rooted in safety, ethics, well-being, and dignity in service to communities and the planet. We need a paradigm shift toward employers actively promoting and investing in whole-person health. Whole-person health is intertwined with community health. To normalize and achieve a whole-person health approach, employers must begin with an understanding that the worth of a worker is more than their direct labor. Putting profits over the health of employees is unsustainable. Profits over the health of people impacted by the operations of an organization are equally unsustainable. Organizations can look to blended finance models like the Triple B Framework by Resilience Capital Ventures to reimagine whole-person health from the lens of whole-community health. Additionally, employers can consider models like employee stock ownership plans as ways to reimagine investments that underpin employer-employee relationships. Ultimately, positioning firmly on safety, equity, ethics, and dignity best facilitates how organizations can grow flexible whole-person health initiatives that flourish regardless of ebbs and flows within the social environment.